I dunno... Maybe I'm just seeing Jesus on a piece of toast, but I'm zooming in on that image and it really looks like it might be some sort of Native American. Also, I'm almost convinced that the emblem is specifically a tomahawk. Do a search on a tomahawk and compare the outline.
Reminds me of when Civ 5 was first announced and a vague and unclear screenshot had a pic of the Iroqouis' UU, and people were debating on whether it looked African or Native American (though most figured it was the latter once we got clearer screenshots). THe unit does look native american in my opinion, though why a barbarian unit would look Native American is anyone's guess.
Yes, it's a Tomahawk icon. Yes, they are barechested and have cropped hairdos like stereotypical Native Americans. I suppose that would rule out a generic unit.
So it's either a new type of barbarian or a new civ can send out obfuscated raider UUs to harm other civs. So the question that supporters of that theory have the burden of answering is, which Native American culture would support having raiders that deflect culpability?
In my post before the one you quote, I suggested that perhaps it only appears to be a barbarian to the Polish player.
I'm thinking it might be some sort of raiding unit that is able to pillage, capture workers, and cause general mayhem for other players without declaring war. The upside is that you're able to disrupt your enemy's infrastructure. The downside is that your UU would be targeted and killed by every other civilization and CS on sight.
Apache and Comanche come to mind. Apache were famous for their raiding and the Comanche built an empire off of raiding Mexico, the US, and Texas. Unfortunately the Comanche are known for being a cavalry civ and although the Apache used cavalry too, I would suspect if this is indeed a UU, then it probably isn't the Comanche.
Here's the problem though - If its the only unit that looks "barbarian" every civ can tell who it belongs to in multiplayer. And they wouldn't do that as they have said. It would have to a copy of a generic unit to do so.
If that was a unique unit for a new Native American civilization that has the ability to appear as a barbarian, that would be kind of silly... you'd KNOW which civilization it belonged to. Having "pirate" type units only works if they're generic.
Yes, it's a Tomahawk icon. Yes, they are barechested and have cropped hairdos like stereotypical Native Americans. I suppose that would rule out a generic unit.
So it's either a new type of barbarian or a new civ can send out obfuscated raider UUs to harm other civs. So the question that supporters of that theory have the burden of answering is, which Native American culture would support having raiders that deflect culpability?
That's not what I'm sure of; though the resolution is too low to get good detail, my impression is that they don't look like a western tribe. They look more in line with the Mohawk.
This would be counter to my expectations, however. If they add a new Native
American, I'd expect it to be from the western U.S. (with Pueblo most likely totally dismissed, we're talking Apache, Sioux, etc.) I also wouldn't be surprised if these tribes had some sort of raiding capability.
I don't see how/why it looks like a tomahawk compared to any primitive stone axe. The in-game model does look fairly distinct compared to other barb models though.
But, would they work outside the bounds of diplomacy like barbarians? Why would they do that and not just make war?
Also, that strikes me as a playastyle that would work well for a human player, but the Human would always know the source of those tomahawkmen and take out the AI civ.
I dunno... Maybe I'm just seeing Jesus on a piece of toast, but I'm zooming in on that image and it really looks like it might be some sort of Native American. Also, I'm almost convinced that the emblem is specifically a tomahawk. Do a search on a tomahawk and compare the outline.
I'm completely sold on it being a tomahawk-sporting unit - given Civ's much-discussed Eurocentric focus one would expect a generic axeman unit to be carrying something more like a European medieval axe with more of a curved blade.
It really does look like it should be a Native American UU, but I find the theory of a UU which can disguise itself as a barb a little far-fetched. But I can't think of another reason for why it would be a barb unit - unless there is a capture/convert unit function which we haven't seen, but I think this too is unlikely.
It could just be they haven't worked out the colour scheme or the finer details of Native American Civ X yet, but wanted nevertheless to make us aware of their presence...
(oh and yes, totally reading too much into this, but I quite enjoy this sort of detective work )
I don't' think it's a privateer-like unit given to all civs, given the fact that it's very clearly not generic enough (whether it's native American is another matter, but it's clearly not generic enough).
It could however, indeed, be a raider type UU - the issue however is that the mohawk hairstyle and the tomahawk weapon (assuming that is what it is in the screenshot) would make sense with the Iroqouis, but we already have an Iroqouis civ. Though it's entirely possible that the devs are just using it for another native American civ, like the Cherokee, without realizing this.
But as others said I think having a raider UU is kind of pointless since everyone knows who's building it.
I have to admit, the unit doesn't look "Western" as far as Native American civs go. I would say it definitely looks eastern (Possibly Cherokee or Seminole, if the barbarian color is only a teaser disguise). I doubt its a UU though, it looks like its just a barbarian unit
I'm wondering if maybe there's a new type of barbarian. Maybe that unit is something that'd appear in the Civil War scenario and for whatever reason they're showing it in a normal game?
What if it's a Barb unit from the ACW scenario? Yes, that's Assyria, but it's also a setup screenshot. What if they grabbed a scenario-specific barbarian and put it in a screenshot that's supposed to represent the main game?
Possibly. Considering that the scenario will only be focused on the eastern theater, perhaps they thought it would suffice if "barbarian" natives would spawn on either side. Or perhaps, there is indeed a generic raiding unit finally coming out?
I'm wondering if maybe there's a new type of barbarian. Maybe that unit is something that'd appear in the Civil War scenario and for whatever reason they're showing it in a normal game?
That seems likely - if the Civil War scenario is largely fought out between the Union and the Confederacy, you'd expect some Native American tribes hostile to both to appear as 'barbarians'...
You know, there's still an advantage there, even against human players who would know who it was attacking them. That is the ability to destroy their infrastructure before you inevitably declare war anway.
If they are disguised as barbarians and treated as such by other players, it stands to reason that they could act as barbarians as well, including walking onto another civilization's territory without an open border agreement and without declaring war.
It would also make it dangerous for anyone to send missionaries/great people/workers/archaeologists/settlers into your territory or even near your territory. They'd be captured without hesitation and without a declaration of war.
The second point would be highly useful, imo. Expansion near this Native American civ would be very risky, especially if you sent out a settler without an escort or only a light escort.
Of course, no reason a barb can't look native American or African. The current in-game barbs are white with deer/elk skins giving off a northern viking-ish vibe, but surely there are other people in the world that speak Barbar as well (Barbar, the official language of Barbarians, of course )
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
)
)
